Skepticism

EVENTS

Episode CCCXLV: Nerds, geeks, dweebs

I’m about to depart for #cvg2012, the CONvergence con, where I shall spend a long, exhausting weekend with My People: the weirdos, the science nerds, the kids who were too smart to try out for the football team, the laughing accepting tolerant folks who don’t have to conform to the comfortable median. It shall be fun. It will almost certainly be distracting — here’s my schedule of the panels I’ll be on, and there will be others I’ll be attending — so this might be a slow weekend for the blog. Sorry, I’ll be busy.

Semi-threadrupt*, but what the hell else is new? Anyway, I got held up on the way to work today ‘cos there was a massive fire and the fire department closed off several streets in my neighborhood. (It was a row of abandoned buildings– so far there’s no reports of anyone being hurt.) I did learn something new, though: I ended up passing the local biker bar and they are open at 6:30 am on a Thursday. One has to wonder what that crowd is like.

*I’m only in it for the rattie pics. I got behind on the last thread, so I said fuck it and crtl+f-ed “ratlets”. Prioritities!

I am in the Sofitel next door waiting for the convention to start. The temperature got up to 100 yesterday. The only activity possible is to stay indoors and enjoy the increased number of skeptic events available this year at Convergence.

*I’m only in it for the rattie pics. I got behind on the last thread, so I said fuck it and crtl+f-ed “ratlets”. Prioritities!

I got Havelock & Sam into the bathroom for a while this morning, to allow Esme some free time away from the ratlets. She was running around, playing with Rubin and munching pumpkin pie on and off for about 45 minutes, then she went berserk, climbing the doors to the Rat Condo.

She wouldn’t stop, so I went over and unlatched the lower door for her. She ran in, nosed in the paper strips to one side of the ratlet box and there was a ratlet, who somehow managed to get out the box. Esme scooped up her kid, put ‘em back, did a quick head count and came back out, ran across the studio and dragged back several sheets of newspaper, shredded them furiously, stuffed them all around the ratlet box, then came back out to play for 20 more minutes. She’s a good mum.

I thought the video was OK, though it focused a bit too much on the costumes, as if that’s all there is to a con. Yeah, some of them are astonishingly well-done, but cosplaying is not my thing. And I had to mute the sound because the music was annoying.

The highlight of a con, to me, is the face time with geeky friends and strangers, and the discussions (whether formal-ish, as at the panels, or informal). And the prowling through the dealer’s room looking for stuff you can’t find anywhere else — well, online, yeah, but at a con you can *touch* things and try them on and chat with the sellers. And the art room. And getting to duck into a video room to watch something or just rest your feet.

Skimming through the undead thread, I read The Postulates of Quantum Mechanics as The Prostitutes of Quantum Mechanics. Sometimes, I am deeply ashamed of how my brain works. But it could be a good title for the likes of Deepak Chopra.

I don’t generally go to conventions. I mean, I occasionally go to the small thing that’s held here for my study, and I went to the first TAMLondon, before it became beyond my budget. (I even did it while still getting over a nasty case of strep throat! Dedication!) I just can’t usually justify spending a large amount of money on most conventions.

She wouldn’t stop, so I went over and unlatched the lower door for her. She ran in, nosed in the paper strips to one side of the ratlet box and there was a ratlet, who somehow managed to get out the box.

Rats vocalize above the range of human hearing, so I’d bet the ratlet made distress calls. And Esme is awesome mum rat!

for all these people that cling to the literal meaning of the components of a word or its original meaning like:

– originally X meant something totes inoffensive. Does not matter if it does now. Example: the N-word.

– the word A,consisting of the components B and C, cannot mean what you say it does because it MUST mean what the components mean. Nope, a compound is more than just the sum of its components.
Example: misogyny.

Can’t really afford to go to conventions anymore. I used to wait with child-like expectation for GenCon each year back when it was in Milwaukee. I could drive myself or carpool with my buds each day and not have to spend a dime on a hotel room. I tried to attend when it moved to Indy, but travel and lodgings just got to be too much. After that, I was able to go to Origins a coupe of times, but only if I whored myself out running game demos to an acquaintance who was selling an overly-complex space combat game that bored the heck out of me. That, and his event schedule didn’t allow me to do much of what I wanted.

These days I try to go with my friends for a day to the smaller wargaming cons held in Northern Illinois (e.g. RockCon and Little Wars) but all we do is shop the dealer’s room for items we can’t normally get at the Friendly Local Game Store. Not this year though, most of my friends are now un/underemployed and can’t justify the expense of gas money for one day of geek shopping.

Is this the place for neophytes to say howdy? If so, howdy. I’ve been reading the blog and comments for years and have recently felt compelled to post every so often. I’ve gotten a lot out of this place; it’s informed much of my personal growth as a humanist, feminist, atheist, etc.. So thanks for that.

Yes, some of the most regressive groups are gathering together to pray the center-right president out of the office. Call this the conservative christian version of Voltron (To use an eighties pop culture reference that I was too old to play attention to the first time around. WTF is my excuse now?)

Wonder if this will be as successful as Gov Goodhair’s use of prayer to end the drought in Texas.

The cinnamons are Ceridwen and Calypso, the pearls are Cigfa and Clio. They are some of the friendliest, most out-going rats I have ever met. They really love people, and are so adorable. (It’s a shame that I am not a photographer and generally don’t take pictures at all).

Sigh. I am visiting friends this weekend whom I haven’t seen in years. They have always been more conservative than I am, which is …. meh, whatever. Sometimes you cut people slack if you’ve known them for a long time.

However, I am getting the impression (not going into details here) that they have become teabaggers.

This will make for an interesting weekend. I am going to try to put a moratorium on talking politics.

I love cons, but can generally only go to ones that occur within my state or an adjacent one. Hell, any that are located outside my city (Indianapolis) are a huge hassle to go to, therefore they had *better* be worth it.

Indy is pretty much Mundania central, so there are generally only two cons per year here — the one that starts tomorrow, which has been held annually for around 30 years, and GenCon. (I’ve been to one GenCon, the first one that was held here, primarily for the actors who were the guests of honor.)

There used to also be a Star Trek con on Thanksgiving weekends. I don’t know if that one still exists.

My favorite con is MediaWest in Lansing, Michigan, which is held on Memorial Day weekend, but it’s been a few years since I went.

you mentioned Leah Libresco (the atheist convert to Catholicism, blogs on Patheos) in Manhunt for Edamaruku and I didn’t want to bring that thread off topic, so I’m mentioning her here, again.

Anyway, I wanted to see how she was rationalizing her decision, so I browsed her posts a bit this morning.

This (link to A little about the queer stuff. Warning : Patheos!) is what I found:

I’m willing to not date women in the meantime, but I wouldn’t necessarily universalize that choice. C.S. Lewis once said he had no particular weakness for gambling, so he left it and other topics out of his discussion of moral behavior (see below). He didn’t think he had the standing to exhort others on the topic. Because I don’t find it much more of a privation to not date women than to not date redheads, I’m in a much different position than gay people or bi folks who care more about gender than I do. I’m not in much of a position to give advice.

She is (at least for now) not forcing her beliefs on anyone (great!), but I still think that she is denying her own sexuality and trying to rationalize it by claiming that “[she doesn’t] find it much more of a privation to not date women than to not date redheads”. Right. She doesn’t care about gender so she’s going to choose not to date women. Right. That makes sense.

And then in the comments:

At present, I don’t think that gay relationships are anything but morally neutral, but I’m willing to avoid them while I fight about it and test how good my arguments actually are.

So, for now she is ok with gay relationships, but she’s going to have to think about it more. Implying, unless I’m wrong, that she might still change her mind on the wrongness of being gay.

Am I the only one offended every time she brings up the redhead thing? So if someone told her not to date someone who exhibited a particular phenotype–regardless of whatever attractions or feelings might be shared–she’d just be fine with that? And what if someone told her not to date black men? I guess that’d be hunky dory too, since, hey, there are billions of men she could date who aren’t black and it’s not like race matters to her!

She can’t see the line between “I have lots of options and am not hung up on a particular trait” and abject bigotry.

I know! It’s ridiculous. She claims that gender isn’t important to her. Like, at all. So maybe bi people who are more hung up on gender would find it difficult to just date men/women, but she finds gender so unimportant she’s going to only date men. Because gender is as unimportant as hair color. As in, she barely notices it. But she’s going to notice it enough not to date women. Whaaat?

part of a trilogy that also comprises The Tits of Star Trek and Bimbos of Biochemstry.

Since nearly all the people behind Quantum Mechanics were men, that would definitely make for an interesting read.

Here in Norway people who’ve paid too much on their taxes last year, get those money back these days. Apparently, according to today’s news, it’s high season for breast augmentation surgery as a consequence.

“Sexual relations” is hardwired into nature. Sexual relations refers to the intercourse between the two sexes of a sexual species. Jellyfish don’t have sexual relations, and neither do amoebas. Men can’t have sexual relations with other men. Sodomy isn’t sexual relations. It’s just putting a penis in a rectum. Not the same thing. What it has in common is a penis and an aperture, if I may be coarse. Sexual relations require more than just any kind of aperture, though. They require both male and female sexual organs. A rectum is not a sexual organ, but a digestive organ.

In the writer/director commentary track to Episode 16 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 5 (The Body), Joss makes the following remarks concerning his characters’ responses to death and mourning in general: “…at this time a lot of people turn to, as Tim Minear would call him, The Sky Bully, but since I don’t believe in The Sky Bully, and don’t really have that to fall back on, I haven’t really found any lessons in death other than I wish it wouldn’t.”

A guy I vaguely know from some shared online communities began sending me instant messages, ranting about a Hillary Clinton quote from when she was the First Lady regarding women as the true victims of war, because they lose their husbands and sons. If the quote was being reported accurately, I could definitely argue with what she was basing it on (there are far worse things done to women in war than being widowed), but he was using it to talk about how men are the real oppressed and devalued members of society.

He spouted off this gem before I blocked him:

Also, how can feminists say with a straight face that feminism is about equality. If I started a movement called “caucasianism” would you think I was fighting for racial equality?

Ah ha! According to he Fount Of All Knowledge™ jellyfish reproduce both sexually and asexually. The more you know and all that.

How’s this for “sexual relations”:

In most cases, adults release sperm and eggs into the surrounding water, where the (unprotected) eggs are fertilized and mature into new organisms. In a few species, the sperm swim into the female’s mouth fertilizing the eggs within the female’s body where they remain during early development stages. In moon jellies, the eggs lodge in pits on the oral arms, which form a temporary brood chamber for the developing planula larvae.

I loved the pan over the conference floor, and half of it was people having conversations, and the other half was people hitting each other with swords!
Does anyone know if talks will be available online?

Hrm. I don’t know if it was the fact that I first used Facebook to sign in here or if it’s simply that my brain isn’t functioning properly today, but I can’t for the life of me get my Gravatar information associated with anything I post here, though I use the same email address for it all.

you mentioned Leah Libresco (the atheist convert to Catholicism, blogs on Patheos)

I’m sure what follows will fullfill my judgement of her as a ludicriously bad thinker….

*reads*

*sips tea*

*reads*

Yup.

Seriously, and nothing of value was lost. I’d much rather have/hang out with a Catholic who is firm on the gay bashing==bullshit than someone like her, theist or not. Maybe it’s because I didn’t read her before so for all I know she gave truly grand pearls of wisdom; but so far everything I’ve seen from her is roughly equivalent to sitting back in a chair and going “blullululululululululululu” noises with your lips.

@Caerie

I’m tempted to suggest that some regulars here make a joint G-mail account and dedicate some time to answering dumbassery like that that the actual recipients are too overwhelmed or don’t want to be bothered to. I had the idea a while ago to offer that service when friends complained about bad responses from dating sites. Would anyone else be interested?

Does he know that Joss Whedon is a very outspoken atheist?

From what I recall he’s of the “if God weren’t made up we’d be forced to kill him” variety.

I’m tempted to suggest that some regulars here make a joint G-mail account and dedicate some time to answering dumbassery like that that the actual recipients are too overwhelmed or don’t want to be bothered to. I had the idea a while ago to offer that service when friends complained about bad responses from dating sites. Would anyone else be interested?

That’s actually a really great idea. Normally I’d do my best to try to explain things to someone (or at least tell them exactly why I won’t speak to their dumbass again), but there are some days I just flat out don’t have it in me.

Why not set up two email lists? One for people to send questions to and one back-channel for discussions.

I would be very interested in such a list. Especially the back channel because I often wonder what to make of things and would like to ask people who knows more about said topic than me. Especially when it comes to feminism.

Big hunk o burning stupid from Leah’s blog (the comments section, not Leah herself):Keep in mind the intrinsic and unalienable human rights of the child, including…

1. The right to know the identity of his/her biological father
2. The right to know the identity of his/her biological mother
3. The right to know the identity of his/her biological siblings if any
4. The right as a minor to cohabit with and be fathered by his/her biological father
5. The right as a minor to cohabit with and be mothered by his/her biological mother
6. The right as a minor to cohabit with and be raised among his/her biological siblings if any

If a parent or sibling dies through misadventure, of course, that isn’t a violation of the rights of the child.

But if an adult conspires to violate the child’s rights knowingly — as in the example of a divorcing heterosexual couple, or a lesbian couple impregnated by an anonymous sperm donor, or in fact any use of anonymous sperm or egg (with DNA) donation at all, then the child’s human rights are being violated by an adult.

I don’t know in what way such a violation should be prosecuted, or indeed what guidelines would help us understand whether a given violation of these rights should be prosecuted, but I strongly suspect some of them should.

Times like this I wish I’d paid attention when people were demonstrating how comic sans worked.

Note the lack of mention of any right to a stable, healthy home where the local priest doesn’t try to rape you in this person’s “rights of the child”. Two biological parents, opposite genders, what more could any child need, right?

Keep in mind the intrinsic and unalienable human rights of the child, including…

And how were these rights determined, O Brilliant One? When people talk about “human rights”, there’s actually more thought and theory put into it than “the Pope said so; that’s why” or “because I have a fantasy about how nature works.”

Any takers on when Leah starts saying that because the particulars of a family’s makeup don’t really matter any more than hair color, it’s totally reasonable to only recognize the above drivel as families?

Oh, ffs, this comment. Hey, it’s A-OK that the Catholic church is institutionally homophobic, misogynist, and transphobic, not to mention pedophilic, because CATHOLIC SOSHUL JUSTISS!! Why, the gay president of his school even “danced in drag” before taking priestly vows!

I don’t get people who reacted with surprise over her conversion with “She is such a smart woman…”. I first heard about her when she converted, so I haven’t read her posts before. Unless her way of thinking took a 180° turn, I honestly don’t understand how someone could mistaken her for an intelligent person. I guess it was all philosowanking that obscured the stupidity.

Fantastic. Here I got caled “dude” and was accused of giving Thundef00t “virtual high five” for stating, that I did not think he is racist while admitting, I might be biased or uninformed (later on I admitted, that I missed some of the evidence pointing to that direction). And on Thundef00ts new faux-pas video I got called “feminazi” and “femistazi” some ten-twenty minutes after calmly writing that he was wrong and he should admit it like a scientist.

It seems, that no mater what I say and how polite and matter-of-fact(ish) I say it, for some people the default answer is insult, sweeping generalisation and branding. I am used to it, but it is depressing nevertheless, especially from people who are very probably at least of above average intelligence.

That reminded me why I usually stay off of internet debates and why I have really draconian debating rules on my blog. Phuy. Some people make me vomit.

And this made me laugh.

You mean like when PZ Myers used Rebecca Watson’s elevator encounter as evidence that sexual harassment was a big problem at skeptic conventions?

I read Pharyngula on daily basis, but I must’ve missed something, because I do not remember such blogpost. Does anybody know, which article they might mean?

Being pregnant has nullified any class or decency that my tastebuds may have once had.

Just wait until you’re breast feeding (if you decide to breast feed, that is.) Breast feeding requires an extra 500+ calories a day. On the plus side, food tastes better. On the minus, abandon any pretense of being a gourmet…

I don’t get people who reacted with surprise over her conversion with “She is such a smart woman…”.

Well, one of the resident philosophers dissected her views recently, and pointed out that she’d only ever engaged with some pretty bad thinkers when it came to atheism. Perhaps those bad thinkers are the ones praising her intelligence.

It seems, that no mater what I say and how polite and matter-of-fact(ish) I say it, for some people the default answer is insult, sweeping generalisation and branding. I am used to it, but it is depressing nevertheless, especially from people who are very probably at least of above average intelligence.

Oh.. Ouch.
*bangs head into wall*
OUch.
I followed the lgbt tag at Libresco’s blog.
Ouch.
Even in her defense of gay marriage, she says things like:

My questions are a little unusual, as I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to limit the behavior (sexual or otherwise) of two consenting adults. As I wrote to Mark:

I don’t think it’s intrinsically unreasonable to tell a person (or a class of people) that sex is out of the picture for them. No one is guaranteed or entitled to a sexual relationship, and there are plenty of other impediments that can mean you can’t have sex with someone you love. (Having to break up with the Catholic boyfriend I loved is a case in point). So, in theory, I don’t object, but I don’t understand why having the beloved be of the same gender means you wind up on the impediments list. That’s what I’d like to read a defense/explication of.

This is not even about gay or straight any more, this is just wrong on any possible level. Ok, she goes on listing objections to being gay she finds unconvincing. That’s nice, but with the bolded part…. I won’t find it in any way surprising if she tomorrow decides that gay relationships (or fuck , any part of LGBT) are fit into that category of people for whom sex is out of the pitcure.
Whaaat?

Goodbye PZ. I’ve enjoyed reading your blog for quite a number of years but with the banning of ThunderFoot I’m sad to say I’ve lost too much respect and trust in you. You have shit on a core principle of skepticism and that is not acceptable.

Goodbye PZ. I’ve enjoyed reading your blog for quite a number of years but with the banning of ThunderFoot I’m sad to say I’ve lost too much respect and trust in you. You have shit on a core principle of skepticism and that is not acceptable.

Goodbye PZ. I’ve enjoyed reading your blog for quite a number of years but with the banning of ThunderFoot I’m sad to say I’ve lost too much respect and trust in you. You have shit on a core principle of skepticism and that is not acceptable.

I don’t think it’s intrinsically unreasonable to tell a person (or a class of people) that sex is out of the picture for them.

So…does she realize she’s endorsing eugenics there? If it’s not unreasonable to tell a class of people that they can’t have sex then, fuck, I guess it’s totally cool to start forbidding all of society’s undesirables from procreation, right?

Well, they certainly should give a shit about the factual content of what is said or lack thereof. Or am I missing something important here? If someone ignores the content and jumps to insults as first instance, hmm, how to put it, they do not make it sound like they are able to communicate in mature and reasonable manner? What is the point of talking with people, if not exchange of informations? To qoute AronRa “Nobody knows everything about everything. Nobody knows everything about anything.”

If someone behaves as an obnoxious idiot, lies publicly, trolls etc. then insults are appropriate.

I do not see the point at all of instantly insulting someone who asks for information or states his opinion while admitting it might be wrong due to lack of information? Educate me on informational content of one-sentence retort whith insult, multiple exclamation marks and zero information content?

Well, It is somewhat informative. Just not in productive way and probably not in the way it was intended.

I do not mind being insultet, though. When it happens I think about it. When it is deserved, I (try to) change my attitude. When it is not deserved, I change my meaning of the opponent for the worse. I the case of Thundef00ts fans it seems really clear cut and I tick them off as assholes and move on.

Weren’t you the guy who asked about sexist insults on some previous incarnation of TET and got detailed explanations? Did you conveniently forget that or does that count as insulting since we explained that you were wrong?

That statement in and of itself isn’t silly or even untrue. The problem is that neither Libresco nor her readers seem to realize that this fact is a bug, not a feature. (Some) male-female sexual acts have procreation as a possibility by default. This is not a good thing. It’s a problem. It means that some women may get pregnant when they are in no condition to raise a child. At risk of sounding like an MRA, it means that some men are at risk of having a child born when they aren’t ready to care for one, emotionally or financially, and, if they’re decent people, still being stuck with having to help raise the child. It would be better if sex and reproduction were completely separate. If reproduction only happened when people wanted to reproduce, poverty, crime, abuse, etc would all likely go way down. If we were rational beings AND sexuality were really something that one could choose, we’d be encouraging people to be gay and use sex for fun, sperm banks for reproduction.

@Ms. Daisy Cutter – I don’t know if you followed up on the thread at Dispatches at all, but I wanted to re-iterate that I’m sorry for having contributed to upsetting you. I think defending the alma matter is a matter of reflex for me, and I do agree with your stance re: the RCC so I should have thought more before hitting send.

I ask because you came in complaining how people have been terribly rude to you without giving you a chance, how you were insulted without those insults having anything informative behid them. I would be grateful if you linked where that happened, because I don’t remember each commenter, those thread about Thunderfoot were long. But I have an example where you honestly asked a question and got many informative answers. Without the insults, even. This trouble with Thunderfoot showed many slimy things coming out from under their rocks. I wasn’t commenting on those threads, but I imagine it gets rather exhausting, having to explain the same damn things over and over again. Maybe you were just wrong this time or came in as a tone troll.

Here’s thunderf00t’s video for the masochistic. Short version: PZ kicked him off (my understanding is it was actually Ed) after guaranteeing him absolute freedom on content. If PZ did say without qualification, then he’s a fool. Is Thunderf00t claiming that if he started promoting young-earth-creationism and Christian revisionist history as the sole subject of his blog, then he should have been allowed to stay? This is besides the distinction between writing about whatever you want and using dishonest tactics.

Also, he dragged Rebecca Watson into this, even though she has nothing to do with FTB and made fun of her for taking rape threat from lulzers seriously. It’s not as if they are death threats from Muslims.

“I don’t think it’s intrinsically unreasonable to tell a person (or a class of people) that sex is out of the picture for them.”

Why is this so controversial? It makes perfect sense to tell someone who has no penis, or who is engulfed in flames, or a class of people who live alone on planets too far apart to realistically achieve contact with other humans in their lifetime that sex is out of the question for them.

In most other cases it’s ludicrous and indefensible, no matter how much you disdain the thought of an erect penis going up another man’s bumhole; that’s not to say the postulation is entirely without merit.

*it can stand for anything you wish.
Example: I had to do my surveys today, but couldn’t find the addresses because the bus driver didn’t even know that part of town exists and several people gave me wrong directions. It’s Rebecca Watson’s fault!

Oh, and it appears my prediction that Thunderf00t would reveal the back channel communication because he thought that it supported him was correct. Note that he skips right over what PZ told him and complains that PZ’s argument was full of straw men and never addressed any of his arguments, which is really ironic considering the source.

I don’t get people who reacted with surprise over her conversion with “She is such a smart woman…”. I first heard about her when she converted, so I haven’t read her posts before. Unless her way of thinking took a 180° turn, I honestly don’t understand how someone could mistaken her for an intelligent person. I guess it was all philosowanking that obscured the stupidity.

From what I have read it seems she struggled as an atheist to work out how we arrive at morality. So rather than carry on thinking she became a Catholic, and gave up that thinking stuff entirely.

Now my take on how we arrive at morality, is that we humans bugger around trying to work out how best to have a society that functions, whilst at the same time allowing individuals as much freedom as possible. As with all human endeavour, it is not easy and we make mistakes, but it something we need to keep working at. Not very philosophical I known.

Bollocks, I forgot about you “women” and your aberrant physiology. My point still stands, though; that is, unless someone comes in to tell me they have been on fire for the past 20 years yet have enjoyed a healthy, fulfilling sex life regardless.

On a side note, what would be the homeopathic cure for “being on fire”?

it can stand for anything you wish.
Example: I had to do my surveys today, but couldn’t find the addresses because the bus driver didn’t even know that part of town exists and several people gave me wrong directions. It’s Rebecca Watson’s fault!

I LOL-ed hard with that one!
I think you can seriously start something with that.

Flat tire on the way to work?
No sex for 7 months?
President Obama wins his reelection bid?

All the fault of Rebecca Watson…
(does this effectively replace God with Ms Watson?)

Now my take on how we arrive at morality, is that we humans bugger around trying to work out how best to have a society that functions, whilst at the same time allowing individuals as much freedom as possible. As with all human endeavour, it is not easy and we make mistakes, but it something we need to keep working at. Not very philosophical I known.

I’ll take this over a couple of paragraphs of unclear philosophy any time.

I ask because you came in complaining how people have been terribly rude to you without giving you a chance, how you were insulted without those insults having anything informative behid them.

Oh. I was not complaining how people have been “terribly rude withoug giving me a chance”. Not on Pharyngula (but yes for Thf00ts video). I am sorry if it came of like that or if it sounds whiney. It is not intended, it was more of an heavy sigh over human stupidity.

I was just speaking generally about the fact, that some people untinkingly insult when they see something they do not like and that they, alas, prevail on the internet – and they might be even here, on pharyngula. So, evidently, my post has been misunderstood, and I hope this clarifies it a bit.

What happened on pharyngula to me is that one person, instead of answering what I said, answered in a way that to mee seems is slightly similar to the “style” of Thundef00ts fanboys. It was this comment

I do not mind it (and I got the answer I needed from someone else) but in the context it seems to me, that the word “dude” was indeed meant as gender-specific insult in this instance.

To everyone going to the Con – please do me a small favour and go to a party, snarf a handful of chocolatey treats and enjoy them on my behalf. I’ve not been able to get to a Con in far too long and it Just Ain’t Fair.
Please also consider joining in with a little filking. No, Virginia, it isn’t disgusting nor is it illegal.

Shit, no matter how much proof reading I make, my comments are full of typos. I hope you will be able to decipher it, I am going to sleep, I had enough of Thundef00t and internet idiots for today already.

You are stupid. No, this has nothing to do with your conversion to the Roman Catholic Church or your previous atheism. I know Catholics whose intellects I admire. Though I can’t fathom their faith or continued loyalty to the church, they are still intelligent, thoughtful people and are capable of reasoned arguments.

You are not.

You are, in fact, a complete idiot.

I assume that you’re unaware of this fact and thus were never a good skeptic, because you hadn’t realized the very first thing in the world you must question is yourself. I want to explain to you how you’re stupid and perhaps–call me an eternal optimist–you’ll actually be able to understand what I’m telling you.

Because I don’t find it much more of a privation to not date women than to not date redheads, I’m in a much different position than gay people or bi folks who care more about gender than I do.

You have repeatedly used this example, illustrating your own stupidity because you must think that it’s clever if you keep echoing it over and over again. Do you pick your partners up in the grocery store? Do you walk along the aisles, musing over this brand and that one? Do you say to yourself “oh, I mustn’t go down Aisle Girl. I’m on a lady diet!”?

Because that isn’t how it works for people who don’t care about gender. Carefully picking who you’ll date by choosing them based on their gender is, in fact, the epitome of caring about gender. You keep using your stupid “redhead” analogy, but how would it be if you were told that you could only date white men? Would that be acceptable? Would you proudly tell people that you don’t care about race and that’s why you’re comfortable exclusively dating white men?

No, you wouldn’t, because choosing your partner based on factors that have nothing to do with your attraction to them and everything to do with intrinsic traits you have been told are bad to date for is, in fact, bigotry. If someone is exclusively attracted to white men with blue eyes, that’s their own business, but when they’re also attracted to Asian men and avoid dating them because they’ve been told that it’s sinful, they are bargaining with bigotry.

I don’t think it’s intrinsically unreasonable to tell a person (or a class of people) that sex is out of the picture for them. No one is guaranteed or entitled to a sexual relationship, and there are plenty of other impediments that can mean you can’t have sex with someone you love.

If you want to say “God said there will be no scissoring and everything God says is morally right,” there would at least be a spiritual debate there. The nature of God could be argued among believers. Instead, you (stupidly) make this general statement that is both repugnant and grounded in the real world.

No one is owed sex by anyone else, but if they are consenting adults there is not one damn reason why any person should ever say it’s “not unreasonable” for them to be barred from having sex. What other classes of people besides LGBT people would you say could be morally barred from having sex? Interracial couples? The disabled? You left that argument wide open, after all. There was no attempt to narrow it down to religious faith or voluntary celibacy. You just flat out said it’s cool to tell classes of people they can’t have sex.

I imagine your friends and readers of your blog told you that you were bright when you were espousing atheism, because they were blinded by their enjoyment of your company and fell into the trap of thinking you had to be intelligent because you were agreeing with them. Now you’ll be surrounded by believers who will tell you that you’re smart because–once again!–you agree with them, and thus have shown your supposed intelligence.

I don’t hate you or condemn you for your faith. If it brings you pleasure, so be it. That’s your life. However, you could agree with me on every issue when it comes to religion and that wouldn’t change my mind one iota, because I have seen your reasoning and your arguments above. Your feeble attempts at reasoning illustrated a single, shining fact:

Well, for starters, you made a “joke” based on the idea that only people with penises have sex, which whaddya know, ignores those who don’t (while echoing the idea that only penis-havers have sex, while non-penis havers have sex done to them).

And when called out, you claimed it was a joke. Which doesn’t really excuse anything. And you acknowledged that you don’t think there was anything wrong with the “joke” in the first place.

I typed three different comments, but honestly, I have no idea what your complaint is. I mean, yeah, people sometimes fire insults first, ask for explanations later. On this blog, it has a lot to do with weariness I mentioned in my previous comment addressed to you. I don’t think insults here can be in any way compared to what you can find in youtube comments. “Dude” is in no way comparable to “feminazi”. I thought you would at least have been bothered by being offered a porcupine or an especially angry comment from Aquaria*, but this…. I don’t get it.
Maybe I’m just too tired, but I really think you are complaining bothered by (or whatever it is) by nothing.

And if anything is insulting, it’s being compared to the nastiness that appears in comments on youtube.

*I love Aquaria’s comments and I can’t remember a time her rage wasn’t justified. I just gave her as an example because her style might be a bit much for someone who appreciates politeness above painful honesty

I don’t think it’s intrinsically unreasonable to tell a person (or a class of people) that sex is out of the picture for them.

And who the fuck gives YOU the authority to — oh, wait, those virginal old pedo-coddlers in Rome, that’s who.

No one is guaranteed or entitled to a sexual relationship

“Not guaranteed or entitled to” != “should be prevented from having.”

and there are plenty of other impediments that can mean you can’t have sex with someone you love.

So let’s just issue some more, right?

Caerie, you get a round of applause for that open letter. It should be a blogpost.

Danishd, you will be missed in direct proportion to your contributions here. Also, I hope the door hit you so hard in the ass on the way out that, if you reproduce in the future, your child will come out with a long rectangular birthmark.

Fredsalvador, to be fair, “skepticism” is the American spelling. Also:

rubbing Thunderf00t’s oily self-love button

Oh, GROSS.

It makes perfect sense to tell someone who has no penis, or who is engulfed in flames, or a class of people who live alone on planets too far apart to realistically achieve contact with other humans in their lifetime that sex is out of the question for them.

In addition to what others have said, people with penises can still engage in sexual behavior that does not involve the penis.

Also, I don’t give a fuck how “insincere” you are. If you step on someone’s toes, you apologize, regardless of your intent. Not having the grace to do so doesn’t make you “sincere,” it makes you a douchebag.

Marismae, while I appreciate the sentiment behind your apology, you seem to be reading justifiable anger at a defense of the Catholic church as a hysterical meltdown. I have to wonder if you would react the same way to a man who made such vehement arguments.

Incidentally, my comments at Ed Brayton’s seem to be disappearing into the ether. Since I have not said anything that was a banning or moderation offense, I am going to presume it is a glitch.

“Well, for starters, you made a “joke” based on the idea that only people with penises have sex”

Did you read the post in which I made that remark?

I ask, because I didn’t do that at all. My intent was reductio ad absurdum of the nonsensical assertion that it’s okay to tell certain individuals and classes of people that sex is out of the question for them. That I have had to explain the intent means my attempt at humour was a failure (or that you didn’t read what I wrote to kick all this off and are judging me in the context of the fallout – but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt since we’re both being civil).

In hindsight I can see how it might be perceived as a misogynist remark and accept that I should and could have worded it better – that was my failing in all this. That and baiting fuckheads. Mostly making an ambiguously worded remark, though. I accept people are angry and apologise for the ambiguity – but I’ll be fucked in all six holes before I ever accept a charge of misogyny from some whiners who see fit to judge me and my motivations on the evidence of one shitty attempt at humour.

Either way it’s obviously the case that people with no penis cannot have sex, that’s why Teh Ghey™* is so terrifying. It’s DOUBLESECKS.

If too much DOUBLESECKS occurs the friction (even with lube) will cause magnetic monopoles to be created leading to the eventual destruction of the universe by the LHC being homeopathically diluted with Deepak Chopra deepity quantum-speak. This is one reason science is untrue and Teh Gheys™ must be eliminated otherwise we will be over-run with Higgs Bumsons. And nobody wants that.

Louis

* It should go without saying that Teh Ghey™ only refers to hot man on man action. Women, and other groups that engage in Lesboshony, are not real people as we have been told by the MRAs and sundry fuckwits. How do we know? Because they are only the life support systems for fuckholes and when they get all uppity they must be treated to rapethreatsthataretotallynotrapethreatsbecausetheyaresaidontheinternet. Simple. Ergo (a Latin word proving I has a triple smart), women cannot have sex unless they are are trying to trap a man into buying them a house by letting him give them a deep dicking which no woman really likes because they only like shoes and shopping and babies. Quod Erat Maleonstrandum.

Golly, one would think if you wished to say goodbye to PZ, you’d *email* him. Someone’s an attention hound!

fredsalvador:

It’s not directed at anyone it was a joke holy fucking shit goddamn

A joke always has an audience, so yes, it was directed at someone. Stop lying. You spouted sexism and you got called on it. That will happen here. If you can’t manage to recognize your own fuckwittery and apolgize, then do the next best thing and get the fuck out of our lounge, you fuckwit.

PTERYXX! I haz an odd rattie problem. Generally, after Mister goes back to work (this morning), the monster dogs stay in the studio with me. Doll’s not a problem, but Jayne…

Jayne’s normal place to lie down is smack in front of the Rat Condo, not usually a problem. Esme, however, has never made her peace with the monster dogs. If I try to block Jayne from laying over there, he’ll get persistent about it, he’s 10 kinds of stupid.

Anyway, will his smell and presence flip Esme to the point of possibly harming the ratlets or attempting to move them? (They are on the lowest level of the condo right now.

(And now dear reader, a brief, serious interlude. Those of a sensitive disposition may wish to look away, I’ve had a rum or two and may be moved to harsh language)

Dear Fredsalvador,

The fact that your “joke” was a) humorously intended and b) sexist is not mutually exclusive. In other words, the humorous intent is orthogonal to the sexism (or otherwise) of your comment. The “joke” “haha, all women are scum” is both sexist, and, hopefully, humorously meant by the person making it. There is a phrase used commonly around here: Intent is not magic.

What this means is if I stumble and tread on someone’s toes, regardless of whether or not I intended to tread on them, their toes still hurt, and it is not unreasonable of them to expect that I acknowledge that pain and apologise for my unintended clumsiness. Pain can be caused independently of intent to cause pain.

Sexism, and other bigotries, work the same way. One can do something sexist totally without meaning to, and still that thing is sexist. Grown ups realise this and accept their errors.

Louis

P.S. There was not enough harsh language in that post so here is some: bottoms, weewee, pootle, David Cameron, flickbiscuit, dirty pillow cough, gibbon wrangling, lady-chest-bump-areas, and flooon.

I apologised; what more do you want me to do, bend over and flagellate myself with a phone cord because some random nobodies on the internet have decided I’m a misogynist so they don’t like me? I’ll make you a deal; I’ll do that, and you can suck the peanuts out of my shit. Deal?

Fredsalvador, do stop sniveling and whining that nobody found your sad attempt at a joke funny. Whether you meant it to be sexist is utterly irrelevant, not least because of your decision to then double down on the sexism.

You can’t really do this “whatever, I do what I want!” shtick while simultaneously moaning about the meanies in the shark thank.

I apologised; what more do you want me to do, bend over and flagellate myself with a phone cord because some random nobodies on the internet have decided I’m a misogynist so they don’t like me? I’ll make you a deal; I’ll do that, and you can suck the peanuts out of my shit. Deal?

This would all be extremely sage and relevant, dear Louis, were it actually my intent to make a sexist joke in the original post. What I actually said, was this:

“I don’t think it’s intrinsically unreasonable to tell a person (or a class of people) that sex is out of the picture for them.”

Why is this so controversial? It makes perfect sense to tell someone who has no penis, or who is engulfed in flames, or a class of people who live alone on planets too far apart to realistically achieve contact with other humans in their lifetime that sex is out of the question for them.

In most other cases it’s ludicrous and indefensible, no matter how much you disdain the thought of an erect penis going up another man’s bumhole; that’s not to say the postulation is entirely without merit.

So, upon reading that, do you think the “penis” crack was a deliberate attempt to demean the sexualities of half the world’s population, as some moonbat claimed earlier – or did I just choose my words poorly?

We report, you decide – except here I really couldn’t care less what you decide since I have no business interests vested in this shit.

Yeah, I mean I know this is a rude blog, but surely there are limits. Next thing Louis will be saying things like “Normal Tebbitt” or “Margaret Thatcher”, and then where will be ? I tell you, it can only end in the most depraved depravity,

“Well, for starters, you made a “joke” based on the idea that only people with penises have sex”

Did you read the post in which I made that remark?

I ask, because I didn’t do that at all. My intent was reductio ad absurdum of the nonsensical assertion that it’s okay to tell certain individuals and classes of people that sex is out of the question for them. That I have had to explain the intent means my attempt at humour was a failure (or that you didn’t read what I wrote to kick all this off and are judging me in the context of the fallout – but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt since we’re both being civil).

In hindsight I can see how it might be perceived as a misogynist remark and accept that I should and could have worded it better – that was my failing in all this. That and baiting fuckheads. Mostly making an ambiguously worded remark, though. I accept people are angry and apologise for the ambiguity – but I’ll be fucked in all six holes before I ever accept a charge of misogyny from some whiners who see fit to judge me and my motivations on the evidence of one shitty attempt at humour.

Oh I missed when they stumbled across the box and at least one sprawled after the first step.

Yeah, they always look drunk after eating. Or maybe stoned. I don’t have much experience with stoned people, but I imagine these kittens have the “Duuude, this shit was good. I want to lick your nose” down accurately.

Caine: you know more about socialization of multiple pet species than I do, especially your own. Most of my rodent breeding experience has been in colonies; I’ve never bred my own pet rats around other animals. That said, I’d say it depends on what you mean by “Esme has never made her peace with the monster dogs”. Sounds like dog Jayne lies in front of the rat condo all the time, so Esme’s familiar with this even if she doesn’t care for it. If she’s normally just uneasy around the dogs, I’d say go ahead, observe her closely and boot them if she gets unusually freaked. If, however, she’s normally *freaky* around the dogs, I’d keep them away just in case. Other tricks might include, say, draping a shreddable towel over part of the rat condo to block sight and dampen sound and smell of the dogs… it depends on the layout of the room, how protected her nesting spot is and such. I hope that’s of some use for being so unspecific.

Sorry, what are you trying to say ? You claimed to have apologised, and you have not. I have no idea why you posted that comment you made earlier, but you will not be thinking that is an apology surely ?

It seems not only are you stupid, and sexist, you are also dishonest. So pretty scummy as a person really.

I have to say, I’m just not that impressed by that sort of YT video (the Climate Crock ones are OK). I love documentary films and recognize that not everything is sleek and high-budget, but so many of them seem so…amateurish. I don’t mind the ones with just a person talking – though I’ve watched few of those, either – but the ones with random images are sad. (GASP as the highlighted email appears! THRILL to PZ’s picture and Wikipedia page!)

One brief last bit of seriousness, this time try to read it for some comprehension.

Whether or not you intended to be sexist is irrelevant. Whether or not it was deliberate or not is irrelevant. You (inadvertently for all I know, I’m not calling you “a sexist” by the way) excluded ~51% of the human population with that comment. Women don’t have penises, thus by lights of your “joke” cannot have sex.

Now I sincerely doubt you meant that, I’m happy to give you the benefit of the doubt. Admittedly benefit of the doubt is rare-ish around here and usually only granted to regulars who have established their bona fides to some degree, and not always even then. Admittedly that is unfair, as in it strikes the occasional false positive, but consider a few factors beyond your control:

1) This blog and its comment section are strong, vocal advocates of feminism and oppose sexism in many forms. We occasionally tie ourselves in knots figuring out our own inherent, inherited social sexism. People who demonstrate that they take part in that process may be given a little more benefit of the doubt than others.

2) This blog and its comment section has been, largely because of 1), subject to a great deal of hostile sexism/misogyny and trolling from various quarters. This leads, rightly or wrongly, to people having itchy trigger fingers.

3) Because of 1) and 2) the environment here is unforgiving of people who do not get this stuff FAST. And I do mean FAST. Even the vaguest whiff of doubling down/notpology/derailing etc (real or imagined) can get the fur flying.

4) If you’re not already aware, there is a substantial body of evidence showing how various societies are sexist, typically sexist against women in the majority of cases, and how that sexism is expressed. Inadvertent exclusions of women in comments, i.e. referring to the male as the default human experience, are part of this. Regardless of intent.

Your intent to make a sexist joke or not is irrelevant. The joke you made could easily be read in a sexist way, perhaps that’s not the most charitable reading, but no one here (to the best of my knowledge) knows you, owes you the benefit of the doubt, and given the environmental factors I mention above are unlikely to extend to you that benefit.

Like I said, that is unfair in some ways, and it does lead to false positives. However, that unfairness and the occasional false positive can be a feature not a bug. They can lead to the more drivelling sexist loons staying away (hoorah!) and they can lead to people learning how not to be sexist themselves.

BTW This is serious comment #2 from me to you. Please don’t double down again. I could be forced into mockery and no one wants that.

The most annoying part : claiming that it wasn’t personal, while PZ’s picture stands there on the screen… he talks about how PZ betrayed him and PZ’s picture appears on the screen again. But it’s nothing personal.
Ok, that was more amusing than annoying.

* A UK Conservative politician who, I shit you not, unironically said “work makes you free”.**

** For those who don’t get this, it’s not the sentiment I am particularly taking issue with, it’s the phrasing. “Arbeit mach frei” is the German version…

…yeah…erm…bit of an own goal politically speaking. Hint: Conservative politicians: when making statements about the value of work (something I strongly think has value btw) try not to emulate Nazi phraseology at a time when you are eviscerating the welfare state. It makes you look a bit…icky.

1) This blog and its comment section are strong, vocal advocates of feminism and oppose sexism in many forms. We occasionally tie ourselves in knots figuring out our own inherent, inherited social sexism. People who demonstrate that they take part in that process may be given a little more benefit of the doubt than others.

2) This blog and its comment section has been, largely because of 1), subject to a great deal of hostile sexism/misogyny and trolling from various quarters. This leads, rightly or wrongly, to people having itchy trigger fingers.

3) Because of 1) and 2) the environment here is unforgiving of people who do not get this stuff FAST. And I do mean FAST. Even the vaguest whiff of doubling down/notpology/derailing etc (real or imagined) can get the fur flying.

4) If you’re not already aware, there is a substantial body of evidence showing how various societies are sexist, typically sexist against women in the majority of cases, and how that sexism is expressed. Inadvertent exclusions of women in comments, i.e. referring to the male as the default human experience, are part of this. Regardless of intent.

Makes a whole lot of sence, especially item #1, thanks!
Its damn hard to participate in the discussion as an outsider. It seems like everyone tries very hard to “step on peoples toes” while not doing it at all, and I am beginning to see that being polite is not sending the right social ques.

I want to put something pithy and curse-laden here, but… Fair enough; I did indeed miss that point, and quite spectacularly too.

Honestly, there was no sexist intent on my part – but as a believer in the tenet that you don’t get to decide what others should and should not consider acceptable behaviour, or what their perception of your behaviour should be, I should’ve side stepped this whole shitpile.

My intent is irrelevant; the penis crack was extremely poorly worded and even allowing benefit of the doubt it isn’t hard to see how it could come across as sexist – which, by my own standards, means it was a sexist remark, and I’m an idiot. An insensitive one. Outwith that, there’s clear gender-baiting in various other replies I’ve made – which makes me a dick.

Not only a dick, but considering I believe criticising sexism, chauvinism and misogyny ruthlessly is the only way to end it, I’m also a hypocrite.

No sarcasm or humour (poorly worded or otherwise) here. I was an insensitive, hypocritical dick, the remark was sexist, and I am sorry.

“It seems not only are you stupid, and sexist, you are also dishonest. So pretty scummy as a person really.”

I can’t speak for anybody but me, obviously, but I doubt I am being too controversial when I say the majority of the regular commenters here are not worried overly about the tone aspect of “politeness”.

Consider this: I would rather someone told me the unvarnished truth in a manner littered with obscenities than told me one single politely phrased lie.

Civility/politeness is not all about the tone of the delivery, it’s also about what is being delivered and why. Sure it’s impolite to shout and scream and swear at someone, but it is also impolite to lie to them, to deliberately refuse to honestly consider their arguments, to dismiss them on the basis of some prejudice and so on.

As has been amply demonstrated here and elsewhere time and again, you can have “rude”, meaningful conversation, “rude” discourse, replete with swearing and bickering and jumping up and down. But you can’t have dishonest meaningful conversation or discourse. The dishonest and the meaningful cancel each other out. Honesty is the cornerstone of meaningful discourse. It’s the core of science, i.e. dispassionately, honestly reporting one’s results. If you want to get to the heart of a subject the distorting it deliberately, accidentally, or by simply apathy is not the way to do it. A few choice words might frighten the horses, but they don’t change the facts.

Another thing to note is that there is no single, perfect one communication style to rule them all. I might prefer the robust style of Pharyngula and you the calm, donnish atmosphere of a Senior Common Room. Or vice versa. It doesn’t really matter. As long as the discussion is honest, meaningful dialogue can be had regardless of whether it is littered with “fucks”.

So, upon reading that, do you think the “penis” crack was a deliberate attempt to demean the sexualities of half the world’s population, as some moonbat claimed earlier – or did I just choose my words poorly?

The answer does not matter. Intent is not magic. Deliberate or not, it was stupid and hurtful. Stop doubling down.

Just look at all these comments, it really represent the state of this place. What a fucking joke.

The only joke here is your tone trolling. I don’t see your name on the masthead, ergo, you aren’t in charge of tone, PZ is. And your lead sentence was evidenceless and whiny. Why should anybody read further? Your idiocy and whinging is present in your lead is normally seen later too. Not worth the effort.

Try again, and lead with “this is what I believe, and this is the evidence (link to evidence) to back it up”. Or expect more ridicule, as that is all you have earned with tone trolling.

Civility/politeness is not all about the tone of the delivery, it’s also about what is being delivered and why. Sure it’s impolite to shout and scream and swear at someone, but it is also impolite to lie to them, to deliberately refuse to honestly consider their arguments, to dismiss them on the basis of some prejudice and so on.

You better believe it, cupcakes are full of mono saccharides without proper fiber content to slow down absorption. It will take 10 years of your life while you run around like a fat pig. Ill take grapes over cupcakes any day of the week.

I apologised; what more do you want me to do, bend over and flagellate myself with a phone cord because some random nobodies on the internet have decided I’m a misogynist so they don’t like me? I’ll make you a deal; I’ll do that, and you can suck the peanuts out of my shit. Deal?

Bullshit fucking liar. You did not apologize. You admitted that you did not apologize when people pointed it out after you used your weak ass “it was a joke excuse”. Now you are claiming to have apologized?

Scroll the fuck up you dishonest fuckwit.

Here’s the exchange in case you’re too fucking lazy to remember what the fuck you said.

(you)It’s not directed at anyone it was a joke holy fucking shit goddamn

(us)“It was a “joke” that invalidated the sexualities of half the human race. And that is not an aopology.”

@Ms. Daisy Cutter – I tend to read all caps comments as someone being upset. Hysterical meltdown wasn’t really part of my thinking; I just prefer not to upset people. And when it happens, I do my best to apologize.

I do believe I would be reacting the same way had it been someone I believed to be male as well, but I appreciate the input.

what more do you want me to do, bend over and flagellate myself with a phone cord

Out of baling twine, are you?

because some random nobodies on the internet

Whom you nonetheless seem to wish to associate with.

have decided I’m a misogynist so they don’t like me?

You made misogynist jokes. It’s been explained to you several times that your intent is not the entirety of the communication; the perception is also an important part. Some reading. Semi-apologizing while digging your heels in isn’t apologizing.

The “no penis” thing was nowhere near as vile as your remark to Tethys, which you then clarified for us “wasn’t a joke.” You certainly haven’t apologized for that.

Yeah, fuck reading all that shit. tl;dr it next time, I have the attention span of a goldfish.

How do you deal with PZ’s original posts, then? Because they require a bit more attention than most comments here, including that one by Louis.

Bullshit fucking liar. You did not apologize. You admitted that you did not apologize when people pointed it out after you used your weak ass “it was a joke excuse”. Now you are claiming to have apologized?

Fucking scroll fucking up you fucking fuckity fuck fuck fuck – if you fucking want me to frigging copy and fucking paste the fucking fuckity fucknuckle other bastard apology I motherpunching tendered a couple of Christfucking posts ago I will arsemunching do so, although fuck I would fucking prefer it if you fucking showed some shitting initiative and Holybastard looked it out yourself.

Ridicule on a blog by some random commenter(s), try again. Also way to contradict yourself by saying I’m not worth the effort while you put effort in a reply.

Furthermore there is nothing wrong with commenting about the tone. If you don’t care about that than that is fine, you can be an asshole all you want to be. Some readers might however be different from you and might like a more civil debate. And it is indeed up to PZ to set the tone on his blog. The tone now of course is the best way to win Christians who are on the fence over to the atheist side.

“You made misogynist jokes. It’s been explained to you several times that your intent is not the entirety of the communication; the perception is also an important part. Some reading. Semi-apologizing while digging your heels in isn’t apologizing.”

The worst thing is, I get all this and have pulled people up for doing exactly what I’ve done here. My line is, you don’t get to decide how people perceive what you do or say. Apparently I do.

Except I don’t. It was complacent and stupid, and will require closer overwatch in future.

“The “no penis” thing was nowhere near as vile as your remark to Tethys, which you then clarified for us “wasn’t a joke.” You certainly haven’t apologized for that.”

Again, correct – I am tempted to simply point to the last apology I made and say “hey look, general all-purpose apology for gender-baiting!”

Considering the personal nature of what I said I don’t think that’s sufficient. Tethys; I’m sorry.

“How do you deal with PZ’s original posts, then? Because they require a bit more attention than most comments here, including that one by Louis.”

Gonna be honest; I haven’t read PZ’s posts. Like, any of them. Aside from the one posted in response to that mess Thunderf00t shat onto FTB, which I only read because Thunderf00t said it was shit, which usually means it’s good. It was good.
I primarily came here to partake of delicious drama arising from Thunderf00t’s latest attempt to have his private army of morons attack his enemies like a pack of winged monkeys. Drama is always fun.

Louis: What you say makes a lot of sence. The way i understand you is that you are saying tone and civility are two orthogonal things, you can easily be civil and calling someone an idiot, and you can easily be the living reincarnation of leave it to the beaver while being uncivil. Dishonesty is the one thing to keep at bay.
This makes a ton of sence: Lying is the one thing which truly negate the usefullness of language, and the one single thing i can remember which polerized me on an issue was reading creationist litterature with the most open mind i could muster, finding the most convincing arguments and fact-checking them against the litterature they cited (and only that). Bingo, the pictures are nice, but thats a big fat lie.

Properly still going to step on toes, but thanks for the clarification, even though it was awfully polite!

Not only a dick, but considering I believe criticising sexism, chauvinism and misogyny ruthlessly is the only way to end it, I’m also a hypocrite.

No sarcasm or humour (poorly worded or otherwise) here. I was an insensitive, hypocritical dick, the remark was sexist, and I am sorry.

I don’t believe you. You wanna know why? You keep using sexist language. Here people don’t accept gendered insults, including dick and prick.

Words are wind. If you really are working against sexistm and being less sexist you’ll prove it in future comments.

You’re a fuckwit until proven otherwise (to me at least).

I came back to catch up on the thread and saw you shitting in the lounge. I told you to fuck off only to find I missed your lastest post. Oh fucking well. You did in fact lie, that what’s I commented on. Your apology just shows you at least admit that now.

Even after people apologize and do better, I don’t take back what I said at the time.

My last post was late, not wrong.

You were wrong, you apologized. Your future comments will tell if I killfile you away.

Since Fred was clear that this is not meant as a joke, I would like him to explain exactly what he is insinuating with this comment.

It was supposed to be innuendo; I was waiting for you to interpret it sexually, at which point I would swoop in and be all like, “I totally didn’t mean it in a sexual way, but rather in this innocuous fashion that’s funny because you thought it was a rape threat”.

Y’know, like when you’re a kid and someone thinks you mean one thing when you actually mean something else, and everyone laughs?

Except this isn’t and wasn’t ever going to be funny, predicated as it was upon an implied threat. It’s stupid as fuck, and I apologise for saying it.

There is also a side benefit to the use of robust tone…perhaps best illustrated with an example:

One day I was in my garden and I noticed one of my chickens had hopped onto my neighbour’s lawn and laid an egg. I spotted this at the same time as my neighbour and we both moved to get the egg. He said “that egg is on my property, it’s my egg”, I said “my chicken stretched its arse to lay the bloody thing, it’s my egg”. An argument ensued and eventually I decided there was only one way to resolve the situation: a bollock kicking competition.

So I said to my neighbour “Right, we’ll have a bollock kicking competition. First of all I’ll kick you in the bollocks, then you can kick me in the bollocks, and we carry on kicking each other in the bollocks until one person gives up, and the other person gets the bloody egg.”

“Alright.” he said.

So I stepped over onto his lawn and kick him right, square in the bollocks and said “you can keep the bloody egg!”.

And that Ladies, Gentlemen and Brownian, is a story that illustrates the powerful beauty of catharsis. Sometimes, juuuuuuust sometimes, it’s worth losing an egg to give someone a right good kick in the bollocks.

You may remember that I had a bit of an accident with my vehicle recently. I have gotten the vehicle back, and the repair shop warranties the repair for a year. I received the written warranty in the mail. The cover letter starts with, “Dear (husband’s name) Beach, Thank you for choosing our shop. This warranty is good for one year, as long as you own the vehicle…”

I was driving a vehicle which is registered solely in my name, I chose the repair shop, I authorized the repairs, and I wrote the check for the deductible out of my checking account. Mr. Beach has never owned the vehicle, which means the warranty is void on its face.

I called the shop, and they said that the information for the warranty comes from my insurance company, which has his name listed first (it’s in both names), and since his name is listed first, they assumed it should go to him.

My wife and I have different surnames, she didn’t take mine (and I didn’t want her to), and she STILL gets raised eyebrows, tuts, ignored, called Mrs Louis-Surname (despite that fact that she’s Dr Her-Surname) even by PEOPLE WHO KNOW.

The default, sexist assumption I can almost forgive, but the deliberate/apathetic ignoring of her simple stated wish by people who know her and know better is…

fred, I have to tell you, I was watching you dig and dig, and I had just purchased stock in dead porcupines (you can make a fortune if you buy at just the right time), and suddenly you offered an apology.

Fuck what you believe. That’s my only response to this, really. You’ll know me by my deeds – I’m relatively new to feminism and as hard as I try I do occasionally fuck up from time to time, but be assured that when I do I will apologise.

Eventually. When I summon the gall to accept I suck, then figure out how I’ve done bad and why it’s bad. I can be a stubborn bastard when I want to be, but I’m not so pig-headed that I can’t admit wrongdoing.

“Killfile”? Ohnoes! It has “kill” in the name so it must be serious! Oh wait it’s on the internet so it’s not serious at all.

“I think ignoring the outside, the negative press, and just focusing on what we can control. I think it’s focusing on the positive steps that the program and our class are making,” Cedar Cliff tight end Adam Breneman said. “In a way, it kind of encouraged me to go to Penn State, and our class is kind of taking that us-against-the-world mentality. We know the whole story is not all about football. We’re well aware of what’s happening. We’re doing everything we can to push forward.”

The negative press? The negative press? It does not bother him that he is going to an institution that refused to do a thing to stop a rapist but he was motivated by the negative press.

DES MOINES, Iowa — Ever since gay couples began flocking to Iowa to marry three years ago, conservative Republicans have been looking forward to amassing enough political power to put an end to it. But now that the opportunity is finally approaching, their goal may be slipping out of reach.

Conservative lawmakers are watching public opinion move away from them on the gay marriage issue, and now fear that voters might not approve a ban even if the GOP can put one on the ballot by winning control of the Legislature in the November elections.

I want to say something sarcastic here about that football player’s comments, but I am afraid it might be too sarcastic and break the universe.

I will settle for looking at my rum and glowering whilst thinking nasty thoughts.*

Louis

* Okay, no I won’t. [NASTY SARCASM AND TRIGGER WARNING]

My first thought on reading that quote was from the perspective of the abused kids thinking “Well gee, I’m sure glad I got fucked in the arse just so I could increase your determination to win a sports game”. My second and subsequent thoughts weren’t as nice.

Yeah, being a bit of a snot to them finally made one see that, no, I don’t like having people grab my hands and try to make me join grace over a meal. It fucking offends me and puts me on the spot, especially since I’m not keen on being touched anyway. Trying to be polite but firm never did jack.

Fuck what you believe. That’s my only response to this, really. You’ll know me by my deeds – I’m relatively new to feminism and as hard as I try I do occasionally fuck up from time to time, but be assured that when I do I will apologise.

Eventually. When I summon the gall to accept I suck, then figure out how I’ve done bad and why it’s bad. I can be a stubborn bastard when I want to be, but I’m not so pig-headed that I can’t admit wrongdoing.

“Killfile”? Ohnoes! It has “kill” in the name so it must be serious! Oh wait it’s on the internet so it’s not serious at all.

No fucking shit it isn’t serious. I’m different here. Yay, you apologized. Doesn’t mean I’m going to be any nicer next time you fuck up. Doesn’t mean I take back my insults. You also haven’t commented on your use of dick in your apology. Even people who admit to using dick and prick as insults don’t use it here, since it’s not accepted by the community.

I really don’t like apologie in general, unless it’s backed up by future actions.

That’s just me.

You’re a fuckwit until proven otherwise (to me at least).

The feeling is most definitely mutual.

Glad we have an understanding then.
———————————————————————

Back to things that matter and the reason why I’m trying to catch up:

I just wanted to check up with you guys. I miss being here. =(

YAY for the cute little ratlets, Caine, I can’t wait to show the little one later!

Glad to see you back home safe, Ogvorbis!

I know how you feel, Ing unemployment is fucking depressing and I can’t wait to start working again. It’s been so long. =(

Hope everyone had a safe and happy holiday. Little One saw fireworks for the second time and loved it. Being older she had more fun and appreciated the events more. It was so cute. :3

Commiserations, congratulations and comfort for everyone. I missed being caught up and commenting here. I’m sorry for missing people, I’m crunched for time currently.

Hopefully will be able to catch up more later since I wasted this free time commenting on fred.

I’ve been around here occasionally over the last 1-2 years I think. Used to post under another username. But that’s almost a year ago too …

I don’t really post that much, mostly just lurk. There are only a few people I recognize really. Caine, Ing and SallyStrange. *waves*

Hi!

I’m the same way. I have trouble remembering a lot of people. Often when reading threads, I lose tract of all the names.

I’ve been lurking since early 2007. I found this place because my bioethics teacher handed out PZ’s blog post about the 9 year old girl in Brazil who was being sexual abused by her step-father, became pregnant with twins, needed (and wanted) an abortion, and the terrible inhumane response of the Catholic Church.

It was eye opening. I wrote a paper about abortion and my stance. I was pro-choice, but wrong on many things. Like restricting late term abortion. I turned in the paper and immediately regretting it once I lurked here. I was dead wrong and felt terrible. Have learned and will continue to learn lots of things from thing place and the people here.

I was really wishy washy unsure at the time. In a “bend so that I don’t break” mode so I didn’t have a firm stance on anything. This place and the people here changed that. I’m extremely grateful, it helped me find out who I am a bit and not feel so alone. I’m still a puzzle person but I’ve put some pieces together now.

I’ve always wondered if that teacher lurks or comments here. I really want to thank her. (Thank you if you are reading! You were an awesome teacher.)

Whoops, got all caught up in remembering. I’ve got dinner to make and an anxious Little One.

You’re damned right I am – but probably not for the reason you’re thinking. You’re just another stupid, instigating liar, and I’m small fry. I’m mostly upset at your peers. Here, let me try an analogy:

Rape is a serious crime – very few people will disagree with that. A crime which, if the accused is convicted, carries severe consequences – social and otherwise. For the latter reason, false accusations of rape must also be serious crimes, since they can cause innocent people to suffer substantial harm.

Now, in many places (primarily the US) calling someone a cunt is a very serious insult. Your community in particular has been pushing hard on the idea that it is in fact an insult that is demeaning to all women every time it is used. You’ve also worked very hard to ensure that there are serious social consequences for anyone who uses it. Whether or not I believe this should be the case (for the most part I actually sympathise) is irrelevant. You do. Just as for rape, therefore, you need to be sure that you’re applying your penalty to people who are actually guilty, otherwise you’re just another witch-hunting mob.

TL;DR: If you’re going to pounce on anything from your “enemies” that is (or can be vaguely interpreted as) a lie or a threat, then to avoid hypocrisy you need to police the verifiable examples of same from your “friends”. Why do you think so many respected members of the skeptic community are fed up with you?

Yeesh, I went to Thunderfoot’s channel on Youtube, listened to his rant, and then (unfortunately) went through the comments for twenty minutes.

I won’t fisk T’foot’s video response to FTB fracas, except to say that it is a disingenuous, ahistorical, context-free, misleading bunch of whingeing AND personal attacks on PZ as a person and as a scientist. I don’t see how PZ’s friendship with T’foot will survive this.

As for the comments section, it’s the ERV-slimepit all over again, including the following comments:

* RW (you know who) needs to be raped
* RW is a hysterical feminist
* EG (you know who) is a nice guy who was flattering her
* Besides RW is middle-aged (horrors!) and ought to be complimented that EG wanted to fuck her
* EG didn’t want to fuck her, he just wanted to share a beverage
* RW created the whole mess by being a shrieking, hysterical feminist, but what can you expect of a woman, anyway
* PZ booted T’foot because he’s sweet on RW and wants to get into her pants
* All feminists hate, hate, HATE men
* All feminists want to fuck men, but are so ugly, men won’t fuck them
* All feminists who see sexism are stone butch dykes
* PZ is a slave to feminists
* Feminists are Nazis (yes, not feminazis, but actual Nazis)
* Feminism is fascism
* RW goes around to conferences, shrieking about this mess, making it worse
* RW wasn’t threatened with rape or violence; atheists don’t do that
* RW was threatened, but it didn’t mean anything
* Sexual harrassment is only when you are physically assaulted; getting hit on doesn’t count — really, it’s a compliment, you ugly bitches!
* PZ bans people. Horrors! From his own blog! (Fainting)

And on and on and on.

I wrote all these down just to point out that the original ERV thread took a few days to get up this point — but on T’foot’s youtube channel, it took only a few HOURS.

T’foot may bask in the attention now, but I believe sincerely that the kind of followers he has now attracted, the kind of followers who will NEVER SHUT UP ABOUT THIS ISSUE are going to destroy his reputation.

Oh FFS, Cupcake, that “witch hunting” meme needs to die already. It’s not a witch hunt, it’s not the inquisition. Don’t you have a nice new slime pit to play in? Isn’t there a burning question of “to edit or not to edit?” to resolve? Go away, you’re boring.

Caine: Havelock and Esme been sort of an item since he arrived, right? I wonder which ones will be more like him and which ones more like her. Good luck with the ratlets, 12 is a lot to look after. I see one of them is already practicing to be an escape artist.

Also, yay Velma Duckie!
————————————————

JAL, nice to hear from you!
————————————————

OK, who spoke the words that summoned . . . oh never mind. Not in the mood for this shit. Tomorrow is Friday, and I’d rather not let anything spoil the anticipation of the coming weekend.
————————————————-

But an interview’s a good thing, right Ing? What sort of position is it for, if you don’t mind sharing?
————————————————

So, the principal might have someone in mind to take over the second kindergarten class. The aide who is not going to have her contract renewed may very well be replaced by someone else. And, the fourth grade classroom will be turned over to the new kindergarten, and fourth grade must move into what is currently the computer lab on the third floor.

Did I mention that the fifth and sixth-grade teachers do not like the fourth-grade teacher? And because of how they treat her, she’s gotten to where she can’t stand them? What a fun year this will be. *gag*

Given that it’s 2:30 am ish here in the UK and I can’t really be bothered to engage you on the subject of sexism (and false equivalences and whinging about Rebecca Watson’s terrible terrible crimes and…) You’ll have to work it out for yourself.

Ms Daisy Cutter: there seems to be something of a miscommunication here. From my perspective you seem to be arguing against points I simply didn’t make. Regardless of incidence or identity, if one thing is considered a serious crime with a serious penalty, then a false accusation of that crime must also be a serious crime. That’s the only point I was trying to make. On incidence of rape, poor handling by courts, incidence of false reporting: on all of these I made no assertion whatsoever, and am open to evidence.

Apropos of nothing, the title of this thread has caused me to have Cher’s Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves ricochet around my head.

Oh, thanks for passing that one on. We’d hear it from the people of the town they’d call us…
I’m exceptionally prone to earworms.
As for football players at Penn State using the “negative press” as motivation…yeah, football players do that sort of shit. They will have adversity to overcome if they have to create it themselves.
I still recall Emmitt Smith of Dallas Cowboys and Dancing With The Stars fame talking about his team overcoming adversity one year back in the mid ’90’s. IIRC, the adversity mostly consisted of their star wide receiver, Michael Irvin, getting busted for cocaine.
Tom Brady is still pissed off about being drafted in the 6th round, and no amount of supermodels is going to make him feel better.
And now I’m going to stand on a chair with a bag over my head until Cher leaves the premises.

It’s not a trend. It’s people tired of asses showing up in our lounge to take a shit on the rug. There’s an Argument Room™ here. Use it.

All right, I’ll go there if that’s preferred. Sorry – dysomniak’s post was here, so it was here I responded.

One last thing, though:

… and whinging about Rebecca Watson’s terrible terrible crimes…

You may have a point – if I was doing such a thing. While I disagree with some of the tactics she’s used, I’ve had very little to say on the subject. Her actions are really no different in character than those of many others in the broader community.

Tristan, if you have a point, and aren’t just trolling, present some real evidence. Try “this is what I believe, and this is the evidence (link to evidence for every claim)”. I’m ready to kill file you too, as you are meandering without a cogent and evidenced point. “Ifs”, or expecting for your unevidence claims to be refuted, are for those without an argument. Unevidence claims can “POOF”, be dismissed and unevidenced OPINION.

Havelock and Esme been sort of an item since he arrived, right? I wonder which ones will be more like him and which ones more like her. Good luck with the ratlets, 12 is a lot to look after. I see one of them is already practicing to be an escape artist.

Also, yay Velma Duckie!

Yes, they were. Still are and unhappily separated. I don’t know who is going to look like who, but I can’t wait to see. It was pretty exciting to see the pigment patterns emerge. It’s 11 ratlets now, the runt didn’t make it. Thanks!

tristan . . . Argh! You “disagree with some of the tactics she’s used . . ”

Okay. WHAT TACTICS. What, specifically has she done that is so horrifically bad that she deserves assault, rape, and death threats. Come on. Be specific.

BTW, I always like to note that if RW were the horrible person these people say she is, she would have identified EG by name and appearance, and would have sent her flying monkeys after him. But she hasn’t. She has been quite restrained about this and not made nearly as much trouble as she could have. All of the trouble comes directly from violent, woman-hating, internet shitheads.

“…I shall spend a long, exhausting weekend with My People: the weirdos, the science nerds, the kids who were too smart to try out for the football team…”

As a University Athletic Therapist I work with many athletes daily…the majority of them are intelligent, thoughtful people…even football players haha. In my opinion the expression of physical skill is as important and inspiring as intellectual expression. Not trying out for football doesn’t necessarily mean you are smart, and trying out doesn’t mean you are stupid.

I know you were just making a joke, but comments like this rub me the wrong way…I getted pegged as a meathead often because I lift weights and am heavy for my height.

In my opinion the expression of physical skill is as important and inspiring as intellectual expression.

Personally considering we literally hand out bags of money and gold to people for athletic ability, I think they’re doing all right in terms of how society treats them and don’t need anyone elses help.

And on a contextual note, the Penn state affair makes me want to slap anyone who whines about athletes being judged as ‘meat heads’. Boohoohoo my heart bleeds.

Seriously, being healthier, being seen as more attractive and judged as better by society and all that isn’t enough? We now need to stop the brainiacs and fatties from patting themselves on the back in the one area they might excel at? Sweet fancy Moses! Let my people go, old man Pharoh!!

Personally considering we literally hand out bags of money and gold to people for athletic ability, I think they’re doing all right in terms of how society treats them and don’t need anyone elses help.

This. I take whining from poor misunderstood athletes as seriously as I take whining from poor misunderstood gamers.

Loftus’ poll is missing a few options, such as “HIVE MIND1111one!”, something about “FemiStasis,” and maybe “I like cheese.”

Blargh, bad pain day. I knew things were off to a great start when I woke up hurting.

Although, apparently a lot of the city is without power. So, I could be sore in the dark, I suppose. And tomorrow it’s going to be 50C with the humidex. Fuck a bunch of that noise.

On the good news front, we found out yesterday that Cinnamon, my ancient kitty, doesn’t need shots for her diabetes anymore, and will be okay with diet alone! YAY! Even though she didn’t mind her shots, I felt bad poking her with pointy things twice a day. Also, it means that when I go out, I don’t have to rush home to inject her, and can instead get drunk.

*raises talon* Also, ‘nother intelligent former-athlete here, if beer-league only. Athletes aren’t *all* entitled assholes, bullies, or stupid. Even though the big-name sports such as football sure can enrich for them.

You said: “Personally considering we literally hand out bags of money and gold to people for athletic ability, I think they’re doing all right in terms of how society treats them and don’t need anyone elses help.

And on a contextual note, the Penn state affair makes me want to slap anyone who whines about athletes being judged as ‘meat heads’. Boohoohoo my heart bleeds.”

It’s a common misconception that athletes make bags of money. Only a very small fraction of a percentage of athletes are lucky enough to be this skilled. The vast majority play for fun or pay to do it.

The Penn state scandal was sickening (and I haven’t been following it – but I believe it involved a Coach – not athletes), but I was just making a minor point about PZ’s insinuation that athletes (specifically football players) were stupid. I’m not a football player. And I wasn’t whining. Your sarcasm is noted (and appreciated), this is obviously a minor issue.

Also, as relates to # 382…not all athletes are healthy or attractive (have you ever actually seen a football team? Haha).

Aww, thanks, Cipher. :) Actually, hugs of the irl sort are very helpful as well, though not nearly as good as someone lacing their fingers together and putting firm, steady pressure on my lower stomach. Hooray, recently discovered things that help!

@ #393: You’re still not getting the whole “social lionization and approval” thing. The jockish folks I know all know that it’s not exactly a poor oppressed state, and especially that organized team sports culture is fucked.

Happiestsadist – yeah, being mocked for being a jock is about as socially disempowering as comments about “whitey” or “teh menz.”

(We’ll leave aside the thorny intersectional issues here, such as the gender policing of women athletes, or how black student athletes get screwed over by College Sports, Inc. Being a jock per se is not an oppression.)

I definitely agree that athletics are not a poor oppressed state – even here in Canada where sports funding is terrible (I work in it). I didn’t mean to imply such. I was just irked by PZ’s offhand comment that smart people don’t try out for football. That’s it.

Have no idea what you mean by social lionization and approval…guess I’ll do some reading.

Ms Daisy: Never heard of her, but wow. Apparently she’s an “Independent researcher in the area of Darwinian Gender Studies” which from a cursory google looks to be the love child of Christina Hoff Sommers and Evo Psych.

Well, no fireworks-spawned fires in the night, to my relief. In the past, some of the folks in this neighborhood have been less than prudent in their use of whizzbangs.
–
Waiting for the ratlets to grow some hair. Then, I shall squee. Right now, they just look…all nekkid. And *hanging head* unappealing.

Ing: In the spirit of your comment at 404, I decided to do a bit of Googling to see if there is any evidence over which the aforementioned possibly existing super-specialists may argue. There unfortunately appears to be little to none.

More fun trivia is that the moniker has sort of been taken up by a UK trans author as Molly Cutpurse.

She apparently was accused of being a dyke even in the day (spinster), so it’s rumored that her marriage was one of convenience…especially since she apparently stated she had little/no interest in sex herself

I recommend popping them into the freezer. Well, maybe not a freezer you’re using for actual consumables, ’cause the chance for mistakes is too high to bear thinking about. Anyway, the point is that sooner or later, we’ll have a serious porcupine shortage (owing to Massive Deployment of same), they won’t be any less dead or rotting, and freezer burning won’t hurt ‘em none. Additionally, they can then be served up as stiff stiffs, or re-heated, as the circumstances dictate.

“Porcupicicles”. Hmmm….
–

My first thought on reading that quote was from the perspective of the abused kids thinking “Well gee, I’m sure glad I got fucked in the arse just so I could increase your determination to win a sports game”. My second and subsequent thoughts weren’t as nice.

The part about how “I think the healing process started long ago” (from memory; not a direct quote) was every bit as nice.
–
Ing, good luck on the interview!
–
Happiestsadist: sorry about the pain, and glad to hear about your kitty.
-

FUCK LEAH LIBRESCO. She’s not a “seeker” “on a path” she’s a bigoted asshole and she is an enemy.

Like I said, her stuff on gays is a wonderful pathetic example of someone who has a conclusion and is working backwards. Of course in this instance it’s someone trying to play connect the dots…where the dots are not even on the same page…hell they’re in completely different coloring books.

Ok, taking a survey here to see if I miscommunication: Did anyone think I was attacking Powerlifter for having the nerve to make a correction, or because I was annoyed by one idea in his post (that we undervalue the physique compared to the intellect)?

If it came off that way I’m sorry, because I was just annoyed with that idea not any concept of ‘how dare you make a correction’

[emphasis mine]
I wonder how much serious thinking she was giving to her quest for the origin of morality. I find it hard to square the idea of her ever being an atheist with the notion that she believes in objective morality. I think there would have to be some type of intellect behind the creation of objective morality. Doesn’t matter what you call this intellect, it still functions in a creator/deity role, thus preventing Leah from being an atheist.
(yes, I invoke No True Atheist)

I wonder how much serious thinking she was giving to her quest for the origin of morality. I find it hard to square the idea of her ever being an atheist with the notion that she believes in objective morality. I think there would have to be some type of intellect behind the creation of objective morality. Doesn’t matter what you call this intellect, it still functions in a creator/deity role, thus preventing Leah from being an atheist.
(yes, I invoke No True Atheist)

I think you’re wrong; as atheist =/= non super naturalist which seems to be sort of where she was believing in a platonic ideal. Also I think it’s possible to believe in such things without believing in supernatural goobydegook. Camels With Hammers goes into that. I think it is going to come down to defining terms and I’m not good for that since I do not know the terminology or too much of the sophisticated philosophy because it often bores me beyond the basics.

re Libresco, I do not like Dan Fincke’s suggestion that poor atheist arguments partly chased her away. She was blogging on fucking Patheos, if she wanted good arguments she had to do no more than pop into Daylight Atheism.

Since I was the one who started talking about Leah Libresco on this thread, I feel it’s fair to note she wrote extensively about LGBT rights and her support of equal right to marriage (from what I’ve seen in browsing posts in her lgbt tag).
The thing about some classes of people being denied right to have sex was horrible, as is her current contemplation of her opinions about being gay. I’m pretty sure the results won’t be nice.

If she is willing to change her opinion about LGBT people because of Catholicism (which everything points to happening) then I agree that she is most definitely a bigoted asshole.

(Although, honestly, I’d call her an asshole just for that some classes of people can be denied sex, having sex isn’t a right shit)

(Although, honestly, I’d call her an asshole just for that some classes of people can be denied sex, having sex isn’t a right shit)

Uh, why the fuck not? Telling someone “you don’t have the right to have sex” is telling them what they can and can’t do with their own body. It infringes on their bodily domain. It’s wrong, it’s damn well assholish, and for that matter is a very very very scary line of thinking.

(Really, how much of a leap is it to go from “gay people can’t have sex because they can’t have kids” to “abortion is wrong because women shouldn’t have sex unless they’re trying to have kids”? And from there…)

I don’t see how that line doesn’t mean that she basically is changing her views or is looking for a way to accept those views while being “gay friendly”. Of course since it seems she doesn’t care that much about actual people this means that she is just finding a way so that SHE can feel find holding onto the identity. “Why I’m not a bigot because I’m not taking away rights! Sex isn’t a right!”

She’s not saying it now — but now the question needs to be asked, why is she not applying her justification for no gay sex to non-gay sex?

Once you start cherry-picking with bodily domain, everything goes out the window. You’re a bigoted asshole against whomever you are denying use of their own body, and the door is wide open for you to apply that denial elsewhere.

I don’t see how that line doesn’t mean that she basically is changing her views or is looking for a way to accept those views while being “gay friendly”.

Agreed.
She seems to be edging towards that.

Comments over there are pretty disturbing to read, as is her ignoring of hateful bigotry on display, so I’m not sure I’ll be going back there.
(They are all very polite, of course, in explaining why being gay is unnatural and/or immoral. *shudder*)

Beatrice: On this blog, it has a lot to do with weariness I mentioned in my previous comment addressed to you.

Maybe. That I would understand. But for someone, who is here only shortly, it is difficutlt to distinguish who is insta insult shooter out of weariness and who out of sheer assholery. They both look the same on brief examination. And that assholes are always on boht sides of any issue I consider to be demonstrable fact, although on some issue, like say feminism, they are inclined to concentrate disproportionately more to one side.

Beatrice: “Dude” is in no way comparable to “feminazi”. I thought you would at least have been bothered by being offered a porcupine or an especially angry comment from Aquaria*, but this…. I don’t get it.

Well, I do not know how high or low on some imaginary insult strehgth scale “dude” lies in comparison with “feminazi”, but I was not talking about the (implied or objective) strengt of the insult, but about the conversation style of – insult first, explain (or not) later. That “dude” is male specific insult I found out later when trying to figure out if it was deserved or not and what might be implied by it.

But lets say, it was out of weariness and I was oversensitive, I give you that. Now allow me to explain, why I was slightly bothered with it, in this place and on (I dare to say) our side of the barrier above all.

Too often I see on the internet the same attitude I met in school, where almost everybody had instant answer to anything I said they did not like – either insult or punch in the stomach. Mostly both. That taught me to shut my mouth, even if I knew and could demonstrate with very high conficence that the truth is on my side. Even now is my career threatened by powerfull protege, evidence and truth be damned.

Internet does not allow people to punch me in the face or make me loose my job, but confrontation with irrational hate (or with something what looks like irrational hate, even if it is mere weariness) makes me uneasy.

BTW, where are you from? Because socialy inept and lacking sense of humor as I am, I am still able to decipher some nuances and between the lines meanings. And I assure you, that I was not going to sleep because this place was too rude. I was going to sleep because it was fucking midnight in central Europe and I knew I have to wake up in six hours time and I was tired of my SIWOTI syndrome already.

Louis: Civility/politeness is not all about the tone of the delivery, it’s also about what is being delivered and why. Sure it’s impolite to shout and scream and swear at someone, but it is also impolite to lie to them, to deliberately refuse to honestly consider their arguments, to dismiss them on the basis of some prejudice and so on.

Exactly. I could not agree more. I have no problem with rude words. I have only problem with content-free derogatory snipes.

Tethys: (And Charly wonders why we need cluebats..sheesh)

:)
Not entirely, there are sure a lot of clueless asshats to fend off around. But I am evidently inept at communicating my message across, be it language barrier or my writing incompetence or both.

Internet does not allow people to punch me in the face or make me loose my job, but confrontation with irrational hate (or with something what looks like irrational hate, even if it is mere weariness) makes me uneasy.

FFS. if the problem is dude what makes you think this is at all ‘irrational’?

And I assure you, that I was not going to sleep because this place was too rude. I was going to sleep because it was fucking midnight in central Europe and I knew I have to wake up in six hours time and I was tired of my SIWOTI syndrome already.

Was this directed at me?

I didn’t realize at first what the hell you’re talking about, but then I remembered I wrote this:

Jesus Christ dancing on top of a cupcake, but this place is just too rude for me to endure. I can’t take it any more. I’m going to… I’m going to go to bed now.

*flounce*

This had nothing to do with you. At the time there were a lot of trolls complaining about rudeness, so this was mocking them. And I really was going to bed. I’m from Europe too.

Actually, the world doesn’t revolve around you. That comment had nothing to do with you. If this is the level on which you perceive insults I’m going to be an asshole and say you are oversensitive.

I think you’re wrong; as atheist =/= non super naturalist which seems to be sort of where she was believing in a platonic ideal. Also I think it’s possible to believe in such things without believing in supernatural goobydegook.

Platonic ideals are intrinsically supernatural gobbledygook. The idea of non-material entities is a supernaturalist idea, let alone the idea that entities which cannot be perceived or measured nevertheless are to be used as benchmarks for things that do exist, or otherwise affect the real world.

He spouted off this gem before I blocked him:
Also, how can feminists say with a straight face that feminism is about equality. If I started a movement called “caucasianism” would you think I was fighting for racial equality?
I’m already having serious issues with my PTSD today. I so didn’t need that MRA bullshit seeking me out.

Did you tell the guy to pick up his porpcupine as he left…?
Why do idiots talk about stuff they don’t even know the definition of (if you deny evolution, I’m talking to you too)?

By the way, you totally rock for that open letter to Leah. I was at a stoplight when I read that. I nearly spit out the AMP I was drinking (good thing I was stopped too).

~~

I suppose someone should mention to danishd that xe should spread around the blame for the departure of Thunderf00t. After all, PZ isn’t in charge of FtB. Moreover, I imagine the pressure they were under from commenters probably played a part in the ejection of Thunderdud.

~~

Dalillama @153:

Blockquote cite allows you to include a header saying who you’re quoting. In theory, anyway, I haven’t got it to work.

at the bottom of the proposed Feminism 101 (thread? post? single page info dump?), perhaps lessons on how to use the various tags would benefit newbies.

This may end up being a double post because there was some disturbance in the force and everything I typed just disappeared.

I totes agree with you both, Imagines and Louis on the comments concerning using the “Mrs.” formation no matter how ridiculous it may be. I have one observation, though. For me, the incorrect naming quickly identified anyone who was trying to be “social” while in fact, was about to attempt to sell me something. Soon as I heard “Hello Mrs. [Name I never took] …” I knew the caller was some sneak or other. Some days that lead to great merriment, at least on my part.

Your comment, Louis, that people who know better do it, well … I’m fresh out of cheery remarks.

OK, so that observation of mine is probably on a list of the smallest silver linings ever found in a grungy disgusting black cloud, but what the hey. *Shrugs*

If too much DOUBLESECKS occurs the friction (even with lube) will cause magnetic monopoles to be created leading to the eventual destruction of the universe by the LHC being homeopathically diluted with Deepak Chopra deepity quantum-speak.

2 things.

1-how long did it take you to come up with that (20 seconds, tops)? I’m still laughing at that!

2-You must be a hoot to hang out with. When’s the Horde dinner party at your house?

Just look at all these comments, it really represent the state of this place. What a fucking joke.
Oh and Tethys # 205. Do you feel big for swimming in your shark tank, Internet hero, how cool you must be and feel while being rude to everyone.
inb4 being called misogynist, MRA, rapist, tone troll etc etc etc.(original cough)

The pickin’s been slim this week.
You may wanna watch out.
The sharks are hungry and Idiot (that would be you cupcake) is on the menu.

Fuck what you like. You’ll see how sincere it is; or maybe you will refuse to and continue to be a thorny little piss-stain. Either way I couldn’t care less. Now go away.

Hey, asshole. You don’t just walk into a bar and start telling the regulars to go away.

This only counts as a friendly warning, but it’s only because the bouncer (PZ) is otherwise occupied (and I don’t doubt that he will poke in here and lay down the law when he sees you): get the fuck out of TET. In case you haven’t noticed, people hang out here, and we appear to know each other somewhat. This is our lounge, and you have no right to come in, stink the place up, and then demand that if we the regulars don’t like you we should leave.

You’re the one who should leave. There’s a thread marked TZT, linked on the side with the text KILL IT WITH FIRE, that you can go play in. You can come back to the lounge when you’re ready to be an adult and respect the regulars.

Well, #FTBullies is starting to get boring, at least since it’s become the All About Bluharmony Variety Hour(s). Seriously, I last looked at Twitter hours ago and she’s still complaining, making shit up, and wasting everyone’s time.

but confrontation with irrational hate (or with something what looks like irrational hate, even if it is mere weariness) makes me uneasy.

Oh FFS. If you’re only here to moan and whinge about tone, about this commenter, about that commenter and bring out that moldy old chestnut of “haters!”, please, just go the fuck away.

Pharyngula is a tight community of people, many of whom have been commenting here regularly for years. I’m young here, only 6 years. Others have been here longer, some less. People here meet up on a regular basis.

We’ve all been on the front lines of important social justice fights. We do this shit every day and have done for years. We not only have a fucktonne of experience, we have *history*. We know who people are, timelines of specific events, yada, yada, yada.

Can all that be confusing when a noob wanders in, even if they have read a bit here and there? Yes, absolutely. Want to know the solution? Before indulging in whinging and assorted moaning, be quiet and read. Read, read, read. Lurk, lurk, lurk. Lurk some more. Go ahead and ask questions, however, make them relevant, good questions. Here’s the kicker: Listen to the damn answers.

If you want to carry on with crap like this for half of forever, figure out the right place to do it. TET is our lounge. This is where we come to blow off steam and connect with one another. This is not the whinging room. The whinging room, along with the making wildly subjective accusations room are annexes of TZT, which is where this sort of crap belongs.

Anyone know what happens to the millions of dollars in, I don’t know what to call them, tax credits? that were alotted to the Creation Fantasyland? As a Kentuckian I’d like to think that the money can be spent now on more worthwhile projects.

I’ve read your comment about returning your Molly and have been feeling guilty since then. I hope what I have written back in my #187 hasn’t somehow contributed to you feeling belittled or attacked. I haven’t meant any offense, which I thought was made clear by the addendum in *, but I’m not always the most tactful person so it’s entirely possible that I screwed that up. If I did, I’m sorry.

Ah you make an excellent point. I’ll take even the slimmest silver lining!

To be fair it has only ever really reached the level of “Minor Eyeroll” and fits into the category of “Almost insignificant thing that just gradually adds up with all the other almost insignificant things to gradually wear one down on a bad day” for the beloved spouse. I can see how it fits into a larger pattern of sexism, but it’s definitely not the most egregious example. And your silver lining comment does make a lot of sense, it’s an excellent litmus test for the clueless or moronic!

Lyn, I’m not sure I would have even noticed if it had been addressed to Mrs. (husband’s name) Beach. The rage was because it was addressed to Mr. Beach. They completed left me off of the correspondence related to my vehicle.

That comment had nothing to do with you. If this is the level on which you perceive insults I’m going to be an asshole and say you are oversensitive.

I did not feel insulted, but I thougt you were being sarcastic. I appologize for missapprehention, it is evident my ability to comprehend casual conversations failed me yet again.
______________________

@Caine, Fleur du mal

Want to know the solution? Before indulging in whinging and assorted moaning, be quiet and read. Read, read, read. Lurk, lurk, lurk. Lurk some more. Go ahead and ask questions, however, make them relevant, good questions. Here’s the kicker: Listen to the damn answers.

I lurked, I read, for about four years by now. But since available time is limited and this web is quite large and grows very rapidly, i could not read all and even if I could, I would not remember everything. I also tried to ask and I got some great answers. But it is obvious, that I do not fit into this community an I made mistake in this thread (well multiple mistakes probably).
Thank you for the clarification about the difference between TET and TZT. To be honest, I did not know it, I missed when and where it was said. I thought they are considered both more or less synonymous “open” threads.

Well, I’ve taken another step into this century. I now have a PayPal account. I wanted to send a little something to the Chris Clarke jeep fund, but they don’t have a SpokesGay to act as a middleperson, so I broke down and did it. It wasn’t so bad. And I’ve just eliminated one more reason to have a checkbook.

It’s interesting (to me) that the only reason I really need a checkbook anymore is for fundraisers. Once the schools and scouts start taking plastic, my checkbook will be almost useless.

If I ever get married, I doubt I would be changing my surname. I’ve went by this combination of name & surname for almost 26 years. I hold no particular like or dislike for it, but it’s something I have gotten used to, something that in my mind is part of who I am and it feels like a new surname would be difficult getting used to.

… Powerlifter was right in the correction, I just used that as a jump off point to be ranty about a separate issue. Sorry if it came off as “hazing”…

Me, I just think you’re awfully big to say as much.

Re that whole separate issue: my general feelings are, in no particular order:

1) I think having a certain respect for skill and determination and passion in sports/physical pursuits isn’t so much the problem. What’s the problem is a general current of anti-intellectualism in certain places at least (and many) that denigrates those whose talents or inclinations run to those more intellectual pursuits.

(Shorter, and in high school friendly language: I don’t want people to start genuinely considering jocks losers. I would like people to start respecting geeks more. But, very seriously, there’s a depth and ingrainedness and larger reach to that attitude the few places I’ve had the chance to observe it that makes me sense this would be a long-term project, and one that’s about a whole lot of things in culture, and which would change an awful lot else–and for the better. Seriously, it’d be a huge watershed, but we’ll probably get fusion reactors working first.)

2) The fact that there’s even a sense of a tribal divide here has always struck me as annoying. No, not at all surprising (humans do tribes; it’s our thing), just annoying. And not really good for people on either side who might take it too seriously. The jock who’s convinced intellectual pursuits are for those sissies over there is missing a lot. So’s the geek who’s been convinced their body is mostly just some useless appendage attached somewhere below their braincase, and one they’re vaguely embarrassed even to be carting around (or, in fairness, who’s been scared out of the gym and off the field by steroid-addled mutants).

3) Competitive team sports, the players thereof, the fans thereof, do very definitely alienate me. And scare me a little. I think it’s true there’s a lot in that culture that’s too easily converted to irrational jingoism, tribalism, again, and to some degree, it does feed into some of the nastier currents in culture. Again, something which, if you could really fix it, you’d be fixing an awful lot else besides..

Mind you, ‘not a team player’ tends to show up on just about every report card and performance review I’ve ever had. And I expect being able to play well with others, cooperate toward a goal is something that’s awfully useful to get right, too. It’s just one of those incredibly sharp two-edged swords. The kid taught to play his position and pass the ball can so easily learn also to march lockstep in formation, follow orders without question, and cooperate properly with the oppressing mob, ‘n all.

fredsalvador, I don’t know if you’re still reading but if you are fwiw I recommend you stick around and maybe lurk a while. You wouldn’t be the first person to put their foot in it on day 1 but subsequently extract it (I note that you show interest in doing so).
.
Yeah, Louis, ImaginesABeach and Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller (love the nym!). Anyone who calls asking for “Mrs.” EitherSurnameOrBoth around here is probably a cold caller and getting short shrift in any case. But I have found the numbers of those screwing up on the surname have dwindled over the years … if the Gummint ::hastily makes propitiatory Sign of the Tentacles:: can cope with different surnames, your stupid company/organisation/brain/delete as appropriate can too.

Surnames have been up for a great deal of debate between me and my partner. I’d been happy to hyphenate or even make up a new surname to share, but he says he’s very attached to his last name and wants to see it passed on to children and shared with everyone in our household.

I have no special attachment to my last name, but the principle of the thing turns me off his name.

I live in South Africa. I guess we could have gone through the rigmarole of legal name changes and paperwork, but they wouldn’t let us do it automatically, the way they did when I eventually took his name. I really still don’t get it, but this was almost 8 years ago. Maybe it’s different now.

No, just optimistic (and, obviously, possibly wrong). I thought fredsalvador fucked up royally, but might be interested in/capable of moving in the direction of away-from-fucking-up in future. Not that this in any way makes the initial fuck-up disappear or not have happened.
.
I do have an (over)optimistic streak sometimes …

Oh, look. Cracked has an article that talks about how “stupid” it is for people to be offended by racially appropriative sports team names. Yep, dehumanizing real people is exactly like calling your team the Giants.

Re last names: My partner and I aren’t married so, of course, don’t have the same last name. When the critter came along, I initially wanted to give her both our last names. My partner pointed out that his last name is two words (it’s a long story involving Americanization and squabbling about embracing or hiding ethnicity) and mine is just weird. And that a kid with the last name “Last Name-Weirdlastname” would never receive any mail addressed correctly as long as she lived. Hmm…given that mail is nearly 100% spam these days maybe we should have…

Dianne – So if your name was too weird and his too… hypehny… what name did you give her then?

(Surname for a family was a huge thing for us. We wanted our little family to have the same name, a little cohesive unit or whatnot, which was really important to us at the time which is why I ended up taking his surname. Which sucks, not only because it is the “Smith” of South Africa, but also because it came from his abusive alcoholic asshole father who is still making our lives difficult.)

Gen: His was rarer so he won. Yeah, his mail always gets lost too so the argument is somewhat suspect, but it is a rare name so I’m fine with the decision. Plus if anyone ever questions whether she’s really my kid I can threaten to show my c-section scar as proof, an option he doesn’t have.